News:

Christos Anesti! Christ is Risen!We hope you had a blessed Pascha and Bright Week. The OCNet Forum is operating in “Beta Mode” due to a major systems upgrade. A maintenance window is currently in effect and users should expect downtime starting at 0300 EDT on Friday the 24th of May.

From a booklet I was given by Sister Julia my 3rd Grade religion teacher, (you have to imagine simple drawings accompanying the words):

A Heart means Love.Two hearts together mean friendship.The best friend in all the world is Jesus. He is better than any friend who ever was or ever will be.He always listens. He always understands. He always cares. He is never too busy. He never grows tired. He never goes away.The Heart of Jesus is all burning with love for people: for you, for me, for everybody. That is why it is surrounded by flames.To save us from sin and to reopen Heaven for us, so that we might be happy, Jesus gladly suffered and died on the Cross.That is wht there is a Cross on His Heart.To show us that He was not keeping anything for Himself, not even one drop of blood, He let His Heart be pierced by a lance.That is why there is a big wound in His Sacred Heart.There never was and there never will be anyone who loves us as much as Jesus loves us.But there are people who forget these things.They turn their backs on Jesus. They never talk to Jesus. They never do things to please Jesus.This is ingratitude. It is a black, cruel crown of thorns all around the Heart of Jesus.Behold the Heart that has loved people so much that it has exhausted itself to prove its love, and in return most people give it only ingratitude.Jesus! Look! I do not want to be ungratefull. I love you.I want to think of You and talk to You and do things to please you always,so that my heart will be close to your Heart and we will be friends.Always.

I still have this booklet, a little soiled after 31 years, but it is still a powerful catechism in my opinion. And even at eight years old I understood the Sacred Heart was a symbol for Christ and His divine love for us, not a seperated piece of him.

Love for the Lord is beautiful, but the creepy devotion to the Sacred Heart was invented by a poor raving mentally ill woman who was a heretic.

This devotion has never been encouraged by even a single Saint.

This devotion is highly controversial and no Orthodox should be caught dead engaging in this devotion.

There's just no need for it. It serves no purpose that is not already served by authentic and orthodox prayers and devotions. Thus, it adds nothing to our Christian walk and introduces much harm to that walk.

The devotion, at least amongst those who hold the true faith of Christ, should be allowed to die a peaceful death.

Love for the Lord is beautiful, but the creepy devotion to the Sacred Heart was invented by a poor raving mentally ill woman who was a heretic.

This devotion has never been encouraged by even a single Saint.

This devotion is highly controversial and no Orthodox should be caught dead engaging in this devotion.

There's just no need for it. It serves no purpose that is not already served by authentic and orthodox prayers and devotions. Thus, it adds nothing to our Christian walk and introduces much harm to that walk.

The devotion, at least amongst those who hold the true faith of Christ, should be allowed to die a peaceful death.

With Love in the Lord Who first loved us,

Hieromonk Aidan+sinner

We saw your other creepy note on the subject and quite frankly your ignorance of your former Church is appalling...well...not really...It is heart warming actually!!

Love for the Lord is beautiful, but the creepy devotion to the Sacred Heart was invented by a poor raving mentally ill woman who was a heretic.

This devotion has never been encouraged by even a single Saint.

This devotion is highly controversial and no Orthodox should be caught dead engaging in this devotion.

There's just no need for it. It serves no purpose that is not already served by authentic and orthodox prayers and devotions. Thus, it adds nothing to our Christian walk and introduces much harm to that walk.

The devotion, at least amongst those who hold the true faith of Christ, should be allowed to die a peaceful death.

Love for the Lord is beautiful, but the creepy devotion to the Sacred Heart was invented by a poor raving mentally ill woman who was a heretic.

This devotion has never been encouraged by even a single Saint.

This devotion is highly controversial and no Orthodox should be caught dead engaging in this devotion.

There's just no need for it. It serves no purpose that is not already served by authentic and orthodox prayers and devotions. Thus, it adds nothing to our Christian walk and introduces much harm to that walk.

The devotion, at least amongst those who hold the true faith of Christ, should be allowed to die a peaceful death.

With Love in the Lord Who first loved us,

Hieromonk Aidan+sinner

We saw your other creepy note on the subject and quite frankly your ignorance of your former Church is appalling...well...not really...It is heart warming actually!!

Being subtle sure ain't style. Nutty way to put an opinion, but I got a laugh.

I have not read any 70s and 80s feminists, but I have read a 19th century Russian Orthodox theologian, and pious priests' writings, on this and similar topics. Those are what inform my views. I am so overflowingly grateful for what they have done in teaching me. It's been a huge blessing in my life. I do not exactly feel as if I have to be a watchdog of Orthodoxy, as if things rise or fall, resting on the online posts I make. I honestly feel that Orthodoxy is Orthodoxy, and it is miraculous, and it will take shape as to its earthly expressions, and progress along, and exist, in accordance with a mixture of human good and bad, and Divine providence which will cause it never to fail from off the earth.

Let's take a quick look at the DSM-IV. Only a clinician can diagnose. I do not pretend to adhere to any clinical model when I remark on poor Sister Margaret-Mary's state. But, honestly, speaking in layman's terms, look at her. The sisters of her house were convinced she was crazy. She would spend entire nights in what she described as "romantic conversations" with Christ. She engaged in severe self-mutilating behaviours and instructed others to eat paper pellets on certain days, fasting. Roman Catholic authorities tried to destroy copies of her life, when it was published, because it was so shocking and vulgar. Could we say kindly that the best impulses of the Roman Catholics of those days, correspond to the sensibilities of Orthodox Christians in our day?

Did St. Dmitry of Rostov encourage devotion to the Sacred Heart? That's what's implied here. Bring forward what he ever taught on this. I challenge the idea (respectfully, as always).

Finally, what in the world does "ignorance of your former Church" mean? My former Church? Huh?

I have not read any 70s and 80s feminists, but I have read a 19th century Russian Orthodox theologian, and pious priests' writings, on this and similar topics. Those are what inform my views. I am so overflowingly grateful for what they have done in teaching me.

That does not make your understanding of the Catholic Church [I am not speaking of Orthodoxy here] any better.

Nor does it explain why kooky souls in the Catholic Church are clinically insane while kooky souls in Orthodoxy are holy or at worst, quaint.

Whether you've read feminist critiques of such kooky souls or not is irrelevant to the idea that what you write is clearly in line with their thinking...It just may not be clear to you.

PS: For some reason I have long thought that you left the Catholic Church for Orthodoxy. I will revise that idea.

On the other hand, if it walks like a duck and quacks like one... I'm only a LPN but the last time a patient phoned me and said she was a goldfish and she was going to Egypt on her private health insurance I mentioned it to her psychiatrist.

Love for the Lord is beautiful, but the creepy devotion to the Sacred Heart was invented by a poor raving mentally ill woman who was a heretic.

This devotion has never been encouraged by even a single Saint.

This devotion is highly controversial and no Orthodox should be caught dead engaging in this devotion.

There's just no need for it. It serves no purpose that is not already served by authentic and orthodox prayers and devotions. Thus, it adds nothing to our Christian walk and introduces much harm to that walk.

The devotion, at least amongst those who hold the true faith of Christ, should be allowed to die a peaceful death.

With Love in the Lord Who first loved us,

Hieromonk Aidan+sinner

lol! You just gave Wyatt a reason to live yet another day.

Actually, Eastern Orthodox saying moronic things about Catholic devotions is not at the top of the list of things that I live for.

On the other hand, if it walks like a duck and quacks like one... I'm only a LPN but the last time a patient phoned me and said she was a goldfish and she was going to Egypt on her private health insurance I mentioned it to her psychiatrist.

Margaret

I might buy the idea that Sr. Margaret Mary is a duck: but I will NEVER concede that she's a gold fish!!...I don't care what SHE says!!...

The Sacred Heart devotion did not exist hundreds of years before our madwoman started self-cutting, making people eat paper pellets, writing shockingly romantic (trying to be polite here) prose, and believing that her heart was surgically removed from her chest and had then been sewn back in. (Yes, Goldfish Lady can't hold a candle to our poor French nun, God bless her heart.*)

You really can't trace the Sacred Heart devotion/delusion back even as early as the year 1400. As I said on the companion thread, there are a few prayers we see starting to be printed in Germany soon after the year 1500 which are the closest thing to a Beginning. But even that's rather vague.

There is one opinion I share in exactitude with Pope Benedict XIV (+1758), one of the most deeply-respected Popes of the last 700 years, still remembered for his level-headedness and erudition: That having a feast of the Sacred Heart is utterly preposterous. While I might disagree with Benedict XIV on the Filioque, at least the fact that he and I are of one mind on this point, goes far toward showing that my position is scarcely outré.

* This sentence may NOT be used by some historian of the 26th century, as proof that devotion to the Excised Holy Heart of Margaret-Mary Alacoque, sanctioned with a universal feast by Pope Benedict XXXVIII, has a clear and documented historical origin, having been traced back to Texas, to the year 2011 at the latest. Absit.

The Sacred Heart devotion did not exist hundreds of years before our madwoman started self-cutting, making people eat paper pellets, writing shockingly romantic (trying to be polite here) prose, and believing that her heart was surgically removed from her chest and had then been sewn back in. (Yes, Goldfish Lady can't hold a candle to our poor French nun, God bless her heart.*)

You really can't trace the Sacred Heart devotion/delusion back even as early as the year 1400. As I said on the companion thread, there are a few prayers we see starting to be printed in Germany soon after the year 1500 which are the closest thing to a Beginning. But even that's rather vague.

There is one opinion I share in exactitude with Pope Benedict XIV (+1758), one of the most deeply-respected Popes of the last 700 years, still remembered for his level-headedness and erudition: That having a feast of the Sacred Heart is utterly preposterous. While I might disagree with Benedict XIV on the Filioque, at least the fact that he and I are of one mind on this point, goes far toward showing that my position is scarcely outré.

* This sentence may NOT be used by some historian of the 26th century, as proof that devotion to the Excised Holy Heart of Margaret-Mary Alacoque, sanctioned with a universal feast by Pope Benedict XXXVIII, has a clear and documented historical origin, having been traced back to Texas, to the year 2011 at the latest. Absit.

Devotion to the Sacred Heart was particularly strong during the middle ages. Many renowned for the learning and holiness developed and encouraged the devotion, among them St. Bernard (+1153), St. Bonaventure (+ 1274), the mystic St. Lutgarda (+1246), St Mathilda of Marburg (+ 1282), the sainted sisters Mathilda (+ 1299) and Gertrude (+ 1302) of the monastery of Helfta, and Ludolf of Saxony (+1380). These perceived in the Sacred Heart a "refuge" in which to recover, the seat of mercy, the encounter with Him Who is the source of the Lord's infinite love, the fount from which flows the Holy Spirit, the promised land, and true Paradise.

Did St. Dmitry of Rostov encourage devotion to the Sacred Heart? That's what's implied here. Bring forward what he ever taught on this. I challenge the idea (respectfully, as always).

Your blessing father!

I found this - an excerpt from an article by Met. Hilarion:

Quote

Some Orthodox Fathers are known for the direct influence Catholic spirituality exercised upon them. St Dimitri of Rostov was under this influence for his entire life: his homilies as well as other works, including the Reading Compendium of Saint’s lives, based primarily on Latin sources,[32] have a distinctly “Westernizing” character; St Dimitri’s library held books by Bonaventure, Thomas a Kempis, Peter Canisius and other Catholic authors, and in his spirituality such elements as the devotion of the passions of Christ, the five wounds of Christ and the heart of Christ may be traced.[33] The influence of Catholic spirituality on St Tikhon of Zadonsk[34]can equally be sensed.

Devotion to the Sacred Heart was particularly strong during the middle ages. Many renowned for the learning and holiness developed and encouraged the devotion, among them St. Bernard (+1153), St. Bonaventure (+ 1274), the mystic St. Lutgarda (+1246), St Mathilda of Marburg (+ 1282), the sainted sisters Mathilda (+ 1299) and Gertrude (+ 1302) of the monastery of Helfta, and Ludolf of Saxony (+1380). These perceived in the Sacred Heart a "refuge" in which to recover, the seat of mercy, the encounter with Him Who is the source of the Lord's infinite love, the fount from which flows the Holy Spirit, the promised land, and true Paradise.

Love for the Lord is beautiful, but the creepy devotion to the Sacred Heart was invented by a poor raving mentally ill woman who was a heretic.

This devotion has never been encouraged by even a single Saint.

This devotion is highly controversial and no Orthodox should be caught dead engaging in this devotion.

There's just no need for it. It serves no purpose that is not already served by authentic and orthodox prayers and devotions. Thus, it adds nothing to our Christian walk and introduces much harm to that walk.

The devotion, at least amongst those who hold the true faith of Christ, should be allowed to die a peaceful death.

With Love in the Lord Who first loved us,

Hieromonk Aidan+sinner

Thank you for such a resonable assessment.

Logged

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

I can't even begin to relate to the people who find the devotion "creepy". It seems like forced anti-Latinism.

Logged

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

So, Papist, what do you think of your Pope, Benedict XIV? He certainly thought in the 18th century that if the Papacy permits a feast of the Sacred Heart, "there goes the neighbourhood." I can't say he used the word creepy, but he did find it preposterous. He marvelled, and I paraphrase but it's close to his original quote, "If we permit a feast of the Sacred Heart, what's next? A feast of the Sacred Eyes of Christ? A feast celebrating Heart of Mary?!"

Remember, that to most Catholics when the Sacred Heart junk first came out, it was shocking, vulgar, and creepy. It took almost 200 years for the Papacy to change its attitude from "it's shocking and awful" to "it's beautiful and wonderful."

We Orthodox are not known for our fast pace of change! Roman Catholicism is like sand, shifting and constantly changing and reinventing itself, and violating its former rules and doctrines by supplanting them with new rules and new doctrines. Orthodoxy is the opposite of all that "blowing in the wind," having steadfast and long-lasting rules and doctrines. Which is a beautiful and uplifting thing to ponder.

And, really, that explains most of this.

P.S. If I knew what St. Dmitri ever said about these topics, I could address it. I don't, so I can't. But I am aware of his closeness to much that is Western in spirit. I just don't think that all of the Western spirit is bad. So I can't criticise him too much for that. For example, I love the Latin Mass and the whole Western Orthodox Patrimony. I just don't like the deviations from that majestic Patrimony.

So, Papist, what do you think of your Pope, Benedict XIV? He certainly thought in the 18th century that if the Papacy permits a feast of the Sacred Heart, "there goes the neighbourhood." I can't say he used the word creepy, but he did find it preposterous. He marvelled, and I paraphrase but it's close to his original quote, "If we permit a feast of the Sacred Heart, what's next? A feast of the Sacred Eyes of Christ? A feast celebrating Heart of Mary?!"

Remember, that to most Catholics when the Sacred Heart junk first came out, it was shocking, vulgar, and creepy. It took almost 200 years for the Papacy to change its attitude from "it's shocking and awful" to "it's beautiful and wonderful."

We Orthodox are not known for our fast pace of change! Roman Catholicism is like sand, shifting and constantly changing and reinventing itself, and violating its former rules and doctrines by supplanting them with new rules and new doctrines. Orthodoxy is the opposite of all that "blowing in the wind," having steadfast and long-lasting rules and doctrines. Which is a beautiful and uplifting thing to ponder.

And, really, that explains most of this.

P.S. If I knew what St. Dmitri ever said about these topics, I could address it. I don't, so I can't. But I am aware of his closeness to much that is Western in spirit. I just don't think that all of the Western spirit is bad. So I can't criticise him too much for that. For example, I love the Latin Mass and the whole Western Orthodox Patrimony. I just don't like the deviations from that majestic Patrimony.

So, Papist, what do you think of your Pope, Benedict XIV? He certainly thought in the 18th century that if the Papacy permits a feast of the Sacred Heart, "there goes the neighbourhood." I can't say he used the word creepy, but he did find it preposterous. He marvelled, and I paraphrase but it's close to his original quote, "If we permit a feast of the Sacred Heart, what's next? A feast of the Sacred Eyes of Christ? A feast celebrating Heart of Mary?!"

Remember, that to most Catholics when the Sacred Heart junk first came out, it was shocking, vulgar, and creepy. It took almost 200 years for the Papacy to change its attitude from "it's shocking and awful" to "it's beautiful and wonderful."

We Orthodox are not known for our fast pace of change! Roman Catholicism is like sand, shifting and constantly changing and reinventing itself, and violating its former rules and doctrines by supplanting them with new rules and new doctrines. Orthodoxy is the opposite of all that "blowing in the wind," having steadfast and long-lasting rules and doctrines. Which is a beautiful and uplifting thing to ponder.

And, really, that explains most of this.

P.S. If I knew what St. Dmitri ever said about these topics, I could address it. I don't, so I can't. But I am aware of his closeness to much that is Western in spirit. I just don't think that all of the Western spirit is bad. So I can't criticise him too much for that. For example, I love the Latin Mass and the whole Western Orthodox Patrimony. I just don't like the deviations from that majestic Patrimony.

Well stated Maria.

Logged

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

I can't even begin to relate to the people who find the devotion "creepy". It seems like forced anti-Latinism.

I am not anti-latin in any sense. I just find no use for it and the thought of it I find not only odd, but pretty useless and yes, I look at it and I am creeped out completely.

That is for ME. I would not pontificate to anyone else about it. If you like, thats cool. I for one, don't.

PP

I never said I liked the images. I don't LOOK at the images. I love however the devotion to the sacred hearts of Jesus and Mary. Heart speaks unto heart...

There are Orthodox icons that give me the creeps. I don't look at them either...nor do I rub anyone's nose in them.

Right. Like I said, Im not pontificating on some soap box expecting all to obey. I am simply explaining that as for ME, I have no use for it. Im sure there are some Orthodox icons that freak you out (I havn't seen any yet for me, but hey, thats the rule of individual perspective)

PP

Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

From a formal point of view it is a devotion that appeared when the Roman see had already defected the Catholic Church. Besides, even if Rome were still Catholic it would be the case of being a local devotion of one see only, that is, even if Rome was still part of the Church it would not be a catholic tradition.

Said that, it doesn't bother me. Maybe because I grew in a Roman country, but I don't see why it couldn't, with minor tickerings to the doctrine around it, become a fully Orthodox devotion. Many things in Rome are fully Orthodox (of which some are shared with the Catholic Churchm and others are local traditions), many are partially Orthodox and, to my understanding only two are frankly heretic (papal ecclesiology and filioque in the context of the Creed).

The Heart is an important theological concept and we can work from there.

Logged

Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

No. I keep those things private unless I am speaking with someone whom I trust to understand me and how I think and my spiritual life. I don't discuss that kind of thing with people who find it hard to believe that a Catholic actually has any efficacious life in the spirit. And I try hard not to do to Orthodoxy and the Orthodox what many of you seem to need to do to us. I don't belittle you or your faith, but I am human and have likes and dislikes, as do all other human beings, Christian or not. I try hard not to impose those preferences on my understanding of ecclesiastical operations and the faith.

I hate saying even this much because it is honest and real and all I can think of as I write it is what fun somebody is going to poke at it.